Can someone explain why it cost so much to fly from SFO to SMF and vice-versa? I'm a student at San Francisco State, but born and raised in sac and I come home occasionally. A buddy of mine and I usually take the bus or rent a car or amtrak but we thought about flying back to sac. United Express has it at $366 one way. That is ridiculous. You would think it would be 50-75 dollars tops

This flight is not meant to be taken as a stand alone, but more of a connecting flight for travelers going from smf somewhere and vice versa, and sometimes flying to the east coast, taking the 1st leg from smf to sfo then onwards, is cheaper roundrip than smf to sfo as a stand alone...crazy

Starting this winter, ExpressJet will start daily service between SMF and Santa Barbara. I wouldn't normally post a rumor that I'd give no better than 50-50 odds, but I'm hearing the chatter now in both cities.

This route was flown back in the 80s by the old Skywest (I think), but nothing since.

This is part of a general expansion in the West for ExpressJet and includes new service in Reno with flights to Ontario, Tucson, Long Beach and Spokane.
Reno hasn't had much good news for their airport lately so this will be cause for celebration there.

Santa Barbara will also get service to San Diego. Great news for me as I go to SB often.

Aw jeez... I don't want to get some people here started. Suffice to say that there was an incident in Oakland recently that some feel was insulting to the troops coming home from Iraq. It was serious enough that the armed services asked that Oakland no longer be used for these charter flights and the airlines have apparently agreed.

None of this has been confirmed and it's not through the usual people I talk too, but I'm pretty confident it will happen.

It seems really backwards to me that FEMA should have any say in development at all. I guess the feds have the power over the local agencies, but Natomas will soon have 200 year protection, just like St. Louis, and I don't think they have any restrictions anywhere.

Hey, if anyone here goes to the meeting, please ask them to include an observation deck. I think one on the north side of the hotel would be spectacular and afford an incredible view of operations. Personally, I'd like to see it include a bar but that might be asking a bit much.

Also - thanks to all who have contacted me regarding the fires here. As many of you know, I was evacuated Monday but was home by Wednesday night. All is well.

The video is impressive, but i had the chance to attend the community workshop today where they had updated renderings and a new video. Also Corgan's architects were on hand to answer questions, (and i had plenty)..

Question #1 While i like the incorporation of the APM (Automated People Mover), why did they choose it over a moving sidewalk?

Their response was, the costs were basically the same as a moving sidewalk and the distance, (which may not look that far) is over 800 feet making a moving sidewalk impratical.

The two APM's will operate independently and should one side break down the other should be able to handle the passenger traffic.

Should the unlikely happen and both break down they will shuttle people to Concourse B.

The APM will allow them to construct the new concourse and central terminal, while the old Terminal B remains operational...

Question #2 How many international arrival gates will be inlcuded and where will they be?

There will be two new international arrivals gates on the north side of the concourse....(see picture below with red circle)..

(Rendering Corgan Associates)

Arrivals will be diverted at the end of the gate (or bridge), where they will move to a downstairs customs facility and claim their luggage, clear customs and put their luggage back on a conveyor, where they will be reunited once they move to the central terminal (where the main baggae claim area will be).

The architect explained that the reason the luggage will be cleared through customs and put back ona conveyor is because arriving passengers still have to take the APM back to the Central Terminal and they didn't want arriving international passengers crowding the APM's with luggage (smart move i think)..

The customs reception facility is impressive imo, and will allow two arriving international flights simlutaneously. It looks like there will be plenty of room to convert another two gates for international arrivals if demand presents itself in the future.

The two international arrivals gates are "swing gates"; meaning they can also be used for domestic arrivals simply by diverting arriving passengers directly into the new concourse B.

The gates will be able to accomodate nearly any sized plane, but as the architect described, the larger planes 767 and 787 will fit at the ends of the concourse without any problem, but the size of the planes parked (or gated) in the middle of the concourse will depend on airlines scheduling their flights. In other words if American airlines knows that it has a 767 due to arrive, and their assigned gates are in the middle of the concourse, then they probably would need to stagger the flight, to make the larger plane fit.

The architect indicated that Southwest might be a tenant; so I asked him if they were thinking about moving from terminal A to the new Terminal and he said that all the airlines were involved in the discussions. So in other words some tenants of the current Terminal B might move to A while some tenants of A might be decide to move to the new terminal.

I also asked him about the Nimby's and those who stalled Terminal A and drove up it's final construction costs by tens of millions of dollars.

He said the EIR comment grace period had passed and that only one issue remained to be worked out; which he felt would not hold up the project.
They are stil predicting a 2011 opening.